Charter Question 5: Adding ethics to the Charter

Kate King

Published 10:23 pm, Tuesday, October 30, 2012

STAMFORD -- Motivated by the flurry of ethics complaints that rocked city hall in recent years, the Charter Revision Commission has recommended cementing Stamford's ethics board and code in the city's constitution.

The fifth Charter referendum question on the Nov. 6 ballot asks voters to give ethical oversight a permanent place in Stamford's governing document. The Commission made the recommendation with the aim of protecting ethics enforcement from political interference, Co-Chairman Jay Sandak said.

"The Board of Ethics was created by way of ordinance, and an ordinance is a legislative act that can be voted on and be repealed," he said. "We didn't want to have the existence of the Board of Ethics subjected to the political whims of any point in time."

More Information

Stamford voters will be asked to accept or reject nine proposed changes to the city Charter on the Nov. 6 ballot. The Advocate will cover each of the referendum questions in-depth this week.

The Charter revision proposal comes on the heels of more than a year of ethics proceedings involving former Board of Finance chairman Joe Tarzia, former finance board Republican Bob Kolenberg and city Rep. Sal Gabriele, R-16. The three officials were accused of improperly intervening in the disciplining of city workers and of leading a campaign of harassment and retaliation against two city employees.

The complaints jolted to life Stamford's long-dormant ethics board, which fielded 11 complaints over the course of a year after more than a decade of inaction. The embattled ethics board faced accusations of bias and ineffectiveness and was named in a federal lawsuit lodged by Tarzia.

All charges of ethical violations lodged against the three officials were eventually withdrawn or dismissed after protracted, convoluted legal and procedural wrangling that cost the city hundreds of thousands of dollars. Tarzia, a 24-year veteran of the finance board who battled two ethics complaints, resigned in February and withdrew his lawsuit against the city and ethics board.

Gabriele is still wrestling with the city's legal department for reimbursement of his $149,000 legal bill. On Tuesday, he said he supports mandating an ethics board and code in Stamford government but did not know whether he would vote in favor of the Charter revision question.

"The city does need a Code of Ethics to make sure elected officials follow the process," Gabriele said. "To make sure we're doing what's in the best interest of residents and not in our own best interests and that we have an ethical standard that we all live by."

In January, former ethics board Chairman Dan Young told Charter Revision Commission members he supported their efforts to formalize the ethics board and code in Stamford's Charter.

"I don't have any objection to that," Young said. "I think going too much further than that might cause concern."

The Charter referendum's fifth proposal outlines some specifics on the board's composition and powers, however. It recommends mandating a five-member ethics board with members appointed by the mayor to three-year terms.

"We don't have any problem with the fact that they're requiring that there be a board and code of ethics," Heaphy said. "Some of the specifics were a little more than we expected."

The Legislative and Rules Committee has spent the last year reworking the city's ethics ordinance. The committee approved a revised draft of the legislation calling for a nine-member board earlier this month, a provision that conflicts with the Charter's proposal for five members.

If the Charter amendment is approved Nov. 6, its requirements will supersede local ordinances. Any changes to the board's membership requirements could not be made until the next decennial Charter revision.

"That does open up a can of worms," Gabriele said. "Now if this does pass you're talking about five members instead of nine. If this doesn't pass it does give the Board of Representatives Legislative and Rules Committee the flexibility that they need to make the board nine members."

Heaphy said she supports mandating an ethics board and code in the Stamford Charter, but would not say whether she is voting for the proposal.

"I feel we're all coming from the same place and I'm sure we'll work it out," she said.

The proposed Charter addition also would grant the ethics board the authority to establish procedural rules for conducting business. This practice is already in effect, with the board voting last year to adopt a confidentiality measure that gave members the power to dismiss complaints that are leaked to the press before probable cause is determined.

Finally, the Charter addition stipulates that the Director of Legal Affairs will represent the ethics board except when a conflict of interest arises. In those situations, corporation counsel would hire an outside attorney for the board.